Hi, On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 at 15:27, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote:
>> I expect the root cause to be the same as in 66268. (Man, is it over an >> year already? The time sure does fly.) > > It looks like it! Terrible that such a serious bug didn’t triaged > appropriately. Somehow, the fix seems to rely on “git merge-base --is-ancestor” for implementing “commit-relation”? Since “build: Add dependency on Git” commit f651a359691cbe4750f1fe8d14dd964f7971f91 from Sep 26 2023 we can assume Git is available by the code that run “commit-relation”, no? And, to my knowledge, the implementation relying on “git merge-base --is-ancestor” does not have the problem, right? Last cherry on the top, from [1], the implementation relying on “git merge-base --is-ancestor” is 35x faster. Win-win, no? Because the fix for ’eq?’ will introduce performance cost and ’commit-relation’ will be even slower, no? Cheers, simon 1: comparing commit-relation using Scheme+libgit2 vs shellout plumbing Git Simon Tournier <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> Tue, 12 Sep 2023 00:48:30 +0200 id:865y4gz5q9....@gmail.com https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-09 https://yhetil.org/guix/865y4gz5q9....@gmail.com
